1

Abortions Illegal After Heartbeat Detection.

9 comments, 242 views, posted 10:42 pm 08/02/2019 in Politics by REALITY
REALITY has 21164 posts, 8066 threads, 1188 points, location: South, Middle. Middle South. In the South, In The Middle.
A tormented man.

Florida Senator Introduces Bill That Would Make Abortions Illegal After Heartbeat Detection

A Florida state Senator introduced a bill that would ban abortions after an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detected.

The bill was filed by State Sen. Dennis Baxley, a Republican, on Feb. 6. The bill would make it a felony for any person who “knowingly or purposefully performs or induces an abortion on a pregnant woman with the specific intent of causing or abetting the termination of the life of the unborn human being whose fetal heartbeat has been detected.”

The legislation is similar to a bill that passed in Ohio late last year before being vetoed by outgoing Gov. John Kasich.

New Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine vowed recently to sign the bill if it was reintroduced and passed, noting that it would definitely be challenged in court by pro-abortion groups but that the decision on its legality would ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.

“It’s time for us to face our history of the last 46 years and the 60 million faces of our offspring that we have extinguished,” Baxley said in a statement. “The heartbeat has always been the clear signal of the presence of life, and that life must be protected.”

He said that the election of Gov. Ron DeSantis gives lawmakers an opportunity to pass the bill.

“I think we have a great opportunity this year,” said Baxley. “Our new Governor, Ron DeSantis has expressed support for meaningful pro-life legislation, so I don’t think we’ll run in to the same issues that Ohio did.”

DeSantis said in June 2018 while campaigning that he would sign pro-life legislation.

SB 792 is identical to HB 235 (pdf), which was filed in the state’s House of Representatives in January by Rep. Mike Hill, a Republican.

The bills have limited exceptions, including if a woman’s life is in danger.

Currently, it’s legal to get abortions up to 24 weeks after conception.

Hill told Capitol News Service that a fetal heartbeat can usually be detected after 18 days but pro-abortion Planned Parenthood said it couldn’t be detected until six weeks.

“We think we can start overturning a lot of these abortion rulings that are killing the unborn,” said Hill. “My oath said that I would protect life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life being the first one.”

epochtimes

Comments

4
11:13 pm 08/02/2019

Flee

I would support this but it is stupid. It basically makes abortion illegal. Heartbeat happens around week 6 and some don't even know they are preggers at that point.

3
12:57 am 09/02/2019

elsels

Yup, heartbeat happens quite early, some women may not know they are pregnant. I think 14 weeks is a good place to stop, if they must be done. After that brain function has been present, they can hear, feel... they feel pain.

2
3:42 am 09/02/2019

Quaektem

Too restrictive.

3
3:56 am 09/02/2019

MASTERV

Any limit to sensitivity of the instrument used to detect a heart beat and differentiate it from the mother? Any proof required to ensure the health care person isn't making up the presence of that heart beat in order to justify not moving forward with the abortion? Any solid science present that the presence of a heart beat is only after a functioning brain capable of sentient thought has developed (if no brain though a beating organ is meaningless). I bet the answer is no and a no on purpose. The purpose being to make it damn near impossible for any woman to get an abortion even though the highest court has ruled it is unconstitutional to prevent a woman from having one.

There are enough stupid people in this world, the human species is not going to go extinct if every capable child bearing woman does not give birth. I see no logical reason a man should ever force a woman that does not want to give birth to have to endure labor. Now if a woman president, a full woman supreme court, a full woman congress wanted to make abortion illegal after the majority of the women (men not included) voted to do so.... them maybe I would have not opinion on the subject, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

These kind of laws are circumventing the supreme court ruling that abortion is legal. Whats the point of having a high court if you ignore there rulings and make laws that prevent a woman from being able to get an abortion. If your opposed to an abortion its easy, just don't get one, problem solved.

4
1:43 pm 09/02/2019

Quaektem

Quote by MASTERV:
I see no logical reason a man should ever force a woman that does not want to give birth to have to endure labor.

I see no logical reason a woman should ever force a man that does not want a child to have to endure 18-24 years of child suppport either...

In a society where 100% of reproductive choice is mase by the woman it should be unethical to hold men accountable. Heck the courts are forcing men who aren't the biological fathers to pay child support!

2
1:55 pm 09/02/2019

Quaektem

This issue isn't one there can be comprise on. One side believes it murder, the other will settle for nothing less than complete autonomy for woman, to the point of trying to legalize actual infanticide.

Personally I think first trimester abortions with allowance for actual medical emergencies is adequate. Women have a dozen forms of birth control, two morning after pills, three monthsto have an abortion, adoption, and abandonment at 'safe drop' centers all without any repercussions (and all can happen without consent or notification of the father).

0
5:04 pm 09/02/2019

tricpe

http://www.teoti.com/military/158288-coat-hanger-machinegun.html

0
6:23 pm 09/02/2019

tricpe

Quote by EoH:
While the killing of any human at any stage of development is to be encouraged, it is interesting to note that confused and mincing humanity alternately whines or gloats that the killing of a fetus with a vacuum cleaner is murder and that the killing an enemy fetus with a bomb is patriotism.
3
2:19 am 12/02/2019

HariSeldon

Such a law would never stand up to a constitutional challenge. Such a law wouldn't even likely pass in the state. It is just a pubicity stunt.

On the off chance such a law would get passed the state legislatures and governor (if he didn't try to veto it) should pay for any legal cases to defend the law. The public shouldn't pay for their religious tantrums

Add Comment

via teoti, or register to add a comment!